Food Protection Trends - September 2010 - 531

Foods that are inspected and passed by FSIS receive a mark of inspection containing an establishment number. Finding information, such as establishment name and number, during a traceback greatly enhances the Agency’s ability to trace the implicated product back to its original supplying establishment. However, other identifying information, such as product name and type, product lot code or sell by/use by date, and purchase location and date, is important to FSIS for traceback or trace-forward activities (Box 1).

CONCLUSION
FDIB is staffed by a multidisciplinary team of public health professionals who utilize a variety of resources to conduct foodborne illness investigations. FDIB examines and evaluates epidemiologic, laboratory, and traceback information to determine if an association exists between illnesses and regulated product. When FSIS-regulated products are associated with illnesses, collaboration between FDIB and public health partners reduces the burden of illnesses caused by foodborne pathogens. FSIS oversees and coordinates voluntary recalls of meat and poultry products with official establishments by ensuring that contaminated products are removed from commerce. The Agency may also conduct intensified verification testing and/or comprehensive assessments of the food safety system at the producing establishments. Lessons learned from FSIS’ involvement in outbreak investigations have in part influenced the Agency’s E. coli O157:H7 policies in many ways. The new risk-based approach to control E. coli O157:H7 is one such example. This approach involves volume-based production sampling, enhanced traceback activities and intensified sampling, and investigation at the identified slaughter establishments. The first initiative changes the sampling frequency for establishments that produce ground beef products. The Agency collects samples from establishments producing higher volumes of ground beef more frequently than those producing lower volumes. Outbreak investigations have shown that products from higher volume producers are generally more widely distributed; thus, contaminated products from these

producers will have a greater public health impact. Traceback activities are enhanced to determine the source of the contamination. All ground beef products testing positive for E. coli O157:H7 are traced back to the originating slaughter establishment. For these slaughter establishments, there will be follow-up sampling along with a thorough review of their HACCP/SSOP (Sanitation Standard Operating Procedures) for that particular product to identify issues warranting further investigation (3, 5). In response to some of the difficulties public health partners experienced in determining whether recalled products were distributed in their state, FSIS made improvements to enhance the recall process. In August 2008, through passage of the final rule, Availability of Lists of Retail Consignees during Meat or Poultry Product Recalls, the Agency now makes available to the public via its Web site a list of the retail consignees of meat and poultry products distributed to the retail level for Class I recalls. This change enables public health partners and consumers to identify where recalled products were distributed through retail facilities in their state (2). This E. coli O157:H7 investigation, used as an example, highlights the importance of inter-agency communication and coordination. When public health partners were able to provide product information from purchase receipts or shopper cards from case-patients, this accurate documentation greatly facilitated traceback, leading to the identification of the establishment that had produced the contaminated ground beef. Procedures used to obtain receipts and/or shopper card information should be adopted by health departments, as a means to obtain accurate purchase information during investigations. During this investigation, aggressive information gathering and extensive epidemiologic investigations by public health partners helped inform FSIS about the scope of product adulteration, which led to expansion of recall activities. These collaborations between state and federal agencies during outbreak investigations are instrumental in obtaining the information needed to initiate voluntary recalls of adulterated product. Through FSIS’ involvement in outbreak investigations, the Agency has gained a

wealth of knowledge of the ecology of E. coli O157:H7 in ground beef products. This knowledge has been crucial in informing new policies that may ultimately have an impact on prevention and control of this pathogen.

REFERENCES
1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2007. 2007 Annual Listing of Foodborne Disease Outbreaks, United States. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/foodborneoutbreaks/documents/2007/entire_ report.pdf. Accessed 2 July 2009. 2. Dept. of Agriculture. Food Safety and Inspection Service.“Availability of Lists of Retail Consignees during Meat or Poultry Product Recalls.” Federal Register 73 17 Jul. 2008: 40939–40948. 3. Dept. of Agriculture. Food Safety and Inspection Service. “Changes in Sampling Frequency for E. coli O157:H7 Testing in Raw Ground Beef.” FSIS Notice 44–09, 2009. 4. Dept. of Agriculture. Food Safety and Inspection Service.“Methodology for Conducting In–Commerce Surveillance Activities.” FSIS Directive 8010.1 Revision 2, 2008. 5. Dept. of Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection Service. “Pathogen Reduction; Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) Systems; (PR/HACCP), Final Rule.” Federal Register 61 25 Jul. 1996:38806– 38989. 6. Dept. of Agriculture. Food Safety and Inspection Service. “Verification Activities for Escherichia coli O157:H7 in Raw Beef Products.” FSIS Directive 10,010.1 Revision 2, 2009. 7. Dept. of Health and Human Services. 2000. Healthy people 2010 Understanding and Improving Health. Washington, D.C.: Dept. of Health and Human Services. 8. G e r n e r- S m i d t , P. , K . H i s e , J. Kincaid, S. Hunter, S. Rolando, E. Hyytia-Trees, et al. 2006. Pulse Net USA: a five-year update. Foodborne Pathog. Dis. 3:9–19. 9. Mead, P., L. Slutsker, V. Dietz, L. McCaig, J. Bresee, C. Shapiro, et al. 1999. Food-related illness and death in the United States. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 5:607–25.

SEPTEMBER 2010 | FOOD PROTECTION TRENDS

531
http://www.cdc.gov/foodborneoutbreaks/documents/2007/entire_report.pdf http://www.cdc.gov/foodborneoutbreaks/documents/2007/entire_report.pdf http://www.cdc.gov/foodborneoutbreaks/documents/2007/entire_report.pdf
Food Protection Trends - September 2010

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Food Protection Trends - September 2010
